The Sun. — London, England, 1810-05-12 00:00:00

ont to the Speaker. If the House had committed the S l olicitor by whom that notice was sent, which _they had an'ue.c i nestionable right to do, was it not pro bable that another Solicitor would have been ap ' pointed who would not have sent a notice but would have brought'an action ? Would the• HoUse have committed him for that ? 'How could they distin guish. whether that - anion' was preferred against the Speaker in his.public or in his private capacity. •If they-had asked the SolicitOr, he would probably have answered, that the interests of his client re quired secrecy. Would the House have committed him on that statement ? If they had done so, he thought they should have acted rashly. It was irr the anticipation therefore -of all those difficulties that the commitment of the Solicitor had not- been ,recornmended. Those who had told him that he was wrong in advising the commitment of Sir. Fran cis' Burdett without foreseeing that he would resist the warrant; could surely not censure him for not having advised. the. commitment ,of the'Solicitor Besides, in that case, the. House .Would have to coin mit the Barrister. If one Barrister was committed, another might .be found; or nothing need be done by the • parties, but to wait till the. end of the Session, when they would be at : liberty to pro ceed. By any such Commitments therefore, the House - would only have shewri their resentment without being able to vindicate their, privileges. The openness with which he found it necessary to speak _on these . subje&S; 'induced, him once More to lament that the lionoUrable . .,Gentlemen opposite felt such an alienation to an. approach to their political adversaries,. even on a subjea of such general interest, that they would not join them 'in the Committee, in . which it could be so much bet ter discussed. With respe& .to the - proposition re commended ,by his Hon. Friend .who had imme diately preceded him, 'he thought that the House would-do well to adopt the motion before them in preference- to it; and adverting to the assertion•of the 'Noble Lord who had spoken early in the de bate,. that this course was novel-in principle, he po sitively denied that.,assertion: :That the House did not always feel themielves called uponto be vindi cators of their own authority was established-by nu merous precedents. -It was a matter entirely of dis cretion, In cases .of moving for a Habeas Corpus, the Judges , could not issue the-writ, becaus e , u n t il the -return- was made to it, they could not ascertain the cause of commitment. ,Invariably, hoWever, such persons were remanded. If the Solicitor knew the cause of the commitment of his client, which he unqueStionably must, he was-subje& to commit ment himself for the proceeding. 'There was no instance, :however, he believed, in which such a committnent had taken place; but there were many instances in which it had not takpn place. He maintained that there was no more reason for cum initting the Solicitor in the case`urider discussion, than there was for committing a Solicitor w,ho had stied_ out a writ of Habeas Corpus on an individual Committed to his knowledge for a breach of the privile,ges of the *Ruse of Commons. In both case's the House might, if. they chose, -exercise the privilege oreoentnit went, and in both cases it was .perfealy in their discussion to absfain, from it. He congratulxed the. House that on the present tfues lion there appeared very little likelihood of any dif ference, of opinion. He rejOiced partieularly that on that part of the subjeel upon which he .had appre lipded ti.e greatest difference, there seemed a ge neral aincr:r2rice• of sentiments. He had -feared that those v..ho were . irni,ressed With 'the necessity of oarryi%g the privileges of the House with a high (Arid hove liven inclined to. proceed with ex ttrmtrie3, wnich he was glad. to find t buy did not - prele._ 7 .Mr.: PONSOI4BY explain d. He should alvi'ays .'that the Right Hon. Gentleman, by inducing the House lu exercist,., their pr ilige of cotrimitnient in a (aNe It did nut call tot it, had put the 'ouse in an unto, tpt.ate sii nation. He could never ,thittli" , tnv Si nation so unfortunate as when a.eonsi-. ci , -;Ale portion of the people, disapproved of.their .Mr. W. WYNNE declared, that however uupopu- - ldr the sentiment might be, he should be ashamed of himself if he hesitated to say, that, in - his opi nion, the Flowe a •hy committing the Solicitor, would, bate shewn their determination- to defend their pri iileges,by punishing these who infringed them. Sir S. Itomitt.v, although he had no doubt that . flie Speaker and the Set jeant ought to - be permitted to. a;;pear and •plead, yet was, unwilling that the question should go to a decision.without - stating very shortly his opinion on some of the doctrines that had been that•evening advanced.- He should not occupy h of the attention of the House, as be bad no 'pleasure in stating to any audience opinions different from • theirs: . Besides, ho did not think that the duty of a-Member of the House permitted him to 'plead in .the House arguments against .the 'House, which in the present case might be repealed in ano ther place. He should therefore silently acquiesce in many - points which hebelieved that he could'art , - swer. He confessed that he did not entertain the opinion, that the privileges of the House of Cern mons could not be :.brought into. a Court of Law . . He had no doubt whatever of the prriiiege Of the 'douse to commit; but he apprehended that ihe.priVileges . of the House of Commons' formed a part I:slthe law of the land, and as such muse be recognised in the courts of Law. Th ere was a dis- tinetion on which he would s.tra few words between the, cases of the speaker and the Serjeant. He had understood abroad that the allegation against the Se7je;mt was, not that.he had executed the warrant of the House of Commons, but that she had exe ciited it in an unjustifiable manner. Now what, ever _opini9n any one might entertain with.resped o submitting the privileges of - the House of Com mons to a Court of Law, no man could.question,the right of a Court of Law to try the mode in which the duty imposed upon their officer.by the House-of ponnnons in the - exercise of their privileges had peen executed. • In case, therefore,, of such an action 'against the Serjeant, be could not conceive the po4ibility of its being,set aside merely by -the Entry on the 'record, that he bad acted under the. authority of the House. lit the doelrine that the priyilees of 'theHouse of Commons co u ld no t b e diseussed in the C our t s o ' f Law, he could nct Con fyir. - It was extremely dan g erous to say; th a t no t any thing' done by eith e r Houses of Parliament in vindication of its,*privileges could be submitted to discussion in a Court of Law. He would imsgine the case. He would suppose - that either House came to a resolution that any particular individual should not exercise that .which was a legal right. Such a case had happened, and at no very distant. period. The Irish House of Commons, a few years ago, came to a resolution that any man who claimed agistment tithes was an enemy to his country ! A similar case might exist- again, and would any one contend that it ought not to be sub mitted- to a Court of Law ? Besides, there were cases •of Habeas Corpus, • in which discussions had taken place in Courts of Law.--Anina logy• had been- attempted to tie established be, tween the cases of commitment by th e Ho use o f Commons and commitment by Courts of Law for contermt; and had been contended, that when an individual was committed by a Court of Law for contempt, no other jurisdktion Lad a right to inter fere.: There were instances, however, where a committal for contempt by one Court had been de cided by another, as erroneous. One most.import ant case was in the reign of Charles - 11. -when Penn and Mead, two Quakers, were tried at the Old Bai ley before Jeffreys, then the Recorder, and acquitted --Jeffreys committed all the Jury for contempt,*be cause they had found a verdiel againit his direction. The case, however, was brought before Lord Chief Justice Vaughan in - the Common Pleas, who enter fully into the discussion, and held ; that thongh .this was-a committal for contempt, h 6 had a right to en ter into the circumstances of the case.; citing-many instances in support of his opinion, among which hte recollected that of. Sir Nicholas Bacon, who had been committed fOr contempt by ~the Court of Chancery, and subsequentlydischarged by the Court of King's" Bench, because the precise most of th e contempt had not been stated. He .repeaed, that in his•Ppinion not any thing,could be more ckngerous than the , possession .by the HOuse of Commons of such a power, *free from the ,cognizance of the Courts of Law. To the privilegesof the House of Cominons he was a friend, for the privileges of the House of Commons were the privileges of the Peo ple. They could be legitimately exercised, however, only for the good of the People, and calamitous in deed would be the situation of the House, and pf the, country; if the period should ever arrive, when the People should be of opinion, that,those privi leges were exeicised, not for their prote&ion, but for their oppression. Mr. WINDHAM said, hisflon. Frierid;rising as he thought to support the privileges of that House, had laid down a doarince which went to subvert them. The sentiments,of the Hon. Baronet who had-caused the snbjed to be' so'mucla agitated, were such as might well be exiithed to - please his audi tors, but he did not expect they would ever have been countenanced-in that House,'or supported by his Hon. Friend. In every tomtnunity. there must be a supreme power from which there could be no appeal. When .this principle was done away there must be an end of all human Governments. There were certain inferior tribunals, over which no other tribunal bad any controul; but where appeals might be made from one to another, these appeals could not, be infinite; they must stop somewhere, as in the ose of Jeffreys, when an 'appeal was made to ano ther Court. 'rite supreme power might 'be im properly exercised, but those Gentlemen wild there= in argued ag,aiest the existence of a: tfibuital in which supreme po'ser was vested; a , *tied against the principal .on which those tribunals - were esta blished,. which were known and aekno !edged throughout . the' country. If existing tribunalS had arbitrary and discretionary powers not common to tribunals at large, it did not follow 'hat such poWers shout i be aholiitted, or 'that they were illegal." It was useless to 'contend against .the existence of 'su preme power, because it might be abuseit without controul. In every community a confidende must be reposed on a presumption that • it, Would not he abused. The House would lose every privilege it might ,claim it they were submitted to a Court of Law. He, protested against the doeirine that would subject them to.such a controul, and contended that such had never been the practice of the Constitu tion. If inconveniencies might arise 'from barring the Courts of Law from deciding nn the cotiduat of ,their Officer, he was certain great inconveni ences might follOw their allowing a Court of Law to examine too minutely the condua of the Ser jeant at Arms. The result might be that their de cision would abrog a te an d annu l the Orcler‘of that House, and subject them to a Court of Justice. He wished the House to co n sid er th a t, and.be properly guarded in its proceedings. He had been some what startled - at the idea of their Officer appearing in a Court of Law: His Hon. Friend had in some measure reconciled him to .it, but he 'would only admit of his goitrg with such a plea as would not endanger their privileges. He assented_ to no more than his letting the Court know, that that for which, he was called upon to answer was the a& oF the House of Commons, and then the Judges knowing that, would see a•complete bar interposed, and de cline entertaining the aelion. The ATTORNEY-QERAL .observed,,-that Han. and Learned Friend opposite could 'not scribe to.the-dodrin e , t h a t t h e d ee i s i On of iheiftousi of Commogns, in stases" of privilege, ought to be conclusive in Courts of Law.. He for one could not be supppoied to be inclined- to deduct from the rights of 'the - Courts of Law. But the atithoriees quoted : by the Right Hon. Gentleman' opposite, who had.spoken so ably on the subject, were perfeelly satisfaetory in establishing that the'privileges Of 'the House of Commons could be decided only by them selves. After the able detail'of thCSe authorities, he owned that he was a little astonished to hear the ar gtiment of his Hon. and "Learned' Friend. If the privileges of the House of • Cm - nu - ions were a fit subjed-of disenssion•in Courts of Law, hoW many Judges had betrayed their declining any interference with them:.. This had particularly occurred to him, persons committed by the House bad been brOught up by. Habeas Corpus,. Among' the rest - , Lord Chief Justice Greyliad..state& that.the Court - possessed no jurisdidion oser the privileges;pf the House t. con), mons, and that the Couit must gife _eke& to those, privileges, by remanqinethe person brOught beidie it to :that custody to **bleb he bad been committed ihe House of Commons. There were many other legal authorities to establish ' the d urine that -the House had a right to deckle' on th , it own privileges, and that decision was final. His Honourable and Learned Friend ha.l recommende3•that a different plea should be put in by the-Sce - jeant and the Speaker to the anion. As . he understood that the defence was to be entrusted to his - care (although he wished that some b e t ter qualified person might be appointed), he thought it, but right to say something of the plea. His Right Hon. Friend had taken a good view of the condua of the Court of King's Bench in pleas of abate ment. He could not but think that it was the pro vince of the Judges to decide on the plea. , He spoke la the presence of learned persons, very competent to correct hid), but it appeared to him that, the pro per plea would be a plea in Bar ;—t hat was, that the - person bringing the action could in no place main tain it. He apprehended also, that whatever might appear upon the face of the proceedings of the House, with respect to their privileges, would be received by any Court as decisive upon that subjea. The Learned Gentleman concluded by expressing himself ready to answer any question that,might be put to him by the Hon. GentleMio. Mr: W. SMITH, thqugh against giving unlimited privilege to the House of Commons, was for abiding by the precedents adduced, and had no hesitation in saying, that it was highly necessary that the House shoull maintain those privileges which. had ''oeen for ages 'established,' and he had, therefere no objection to the present motion. • Lord MILTON was apprehensive that; by, agreeing to the Resolution, the House would put the privi- leges out of their own hands.. • The Resolutions were then put, and carried with out a dissenting voice. Mr. D. GIDDY stated, that he had one more Resolution to-propose. Although there could. be no doubt that the privileges of the . Hduse of COmmons would be perfectly sale in the hands of the Speaker, who for. so many years bad per formed the duties of his high and important office, in a. Manner the, most honourable to himself, - and the most satisfaelory to the House and to the country ; yet it would not be consistent with the respect due to his dignity, to impose upon. him such a task ; nor would it be consonant to the usage of the House to commit it to the execution of a private inividual. lie therefore moved, " That the Attorney-General be direded to defers 4 the speaker and the Serjeant against the said ad:on."' • This resolution..was also agreed to. Mr. W. WYNNE asked, whether it was to be held out by the House to the Public, that any per son might commence such a suit as that . recently underdiscus.sion, without being guilty of a breach of the privileges of the House ? He instanced an . analogous case in the House of Lords in the present reign. On the 28th November,.l76B, . the Lords were informed that a Mr. East (one of his Majesty's Justices of the Peace) had been served with a notice of a&ion for his exertions in suppressing a riot under the orders of the House. The ; parties serving the notice were ordeted to attend at the Bar -qt .the House of Lords. When they did attend they. were committed to the custody of the Usher of ,the Black Rod, and were not discharged until they had given Mr. East a release from tip . The Hon; Gentleman repeated, that- he wished to be informed whether the Public were to, understand that :the established pradice of the House on this subje& Was at an end, and that cycry- man who chose it - was at liberty to institute a suit against. the Speakerwith impunity ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied that he was not prepared to express any decided opinion on . the subjeCt.. In all cases of this .description, the House, of. course, would exercise their discretion; and would determine according to circumstances. Mr. WINDHAM rose, and was proceeding to make A few observations, when he wasinterrnpted, there being no question before, the House. • The Report was ordered to lie on the•tabe. The House resohed' itself into a Committee of Supply. . Mr. CROKER moved, that 1,511,0001. should be granted for the Ordinaries of the Navy. Sir C. POL.E made some observations on the id ditien to the estimate. If it was possible to reduce our force from 140,000 to 130,000 men; hg. hoped those who had been in the service seventeen. or eighteen years would allowed their discharge. He wished for the reduction of press 7 gangs, and that something might be done to mitigate the hardships of harbour duty. He concluded, cautioning Mini sters against raising the salaries ot.some qt the public servants, and overlooking others who had equal Or superior claims to an advance. • . Mr. R. WARD went over the items of. the esti mate, explained the cause of the addition' that had, been. made, and proved it to be necessary: We ought always to keep our navyready to cope nut only with the fleets of France and Russia combined, but with those of the whole world. . Captain PARKER thought it-would be a very-harsh measure .of any Government to discharge their old sailors. He also objected to the reduction of the impress service. • Lord CDCHRANE. adverted to the Pension List of the Navy, and made acomparison hetween.the pen sions allowed to the Officers of che-Civil -Depart- Ment and their . families. The disproportion he con tended, was enormous—the Civil Officers haying a most unfair prefetence. . He next compared the e.x7 pences of the List with the sinecures of,,Lords Ar den; Camden, .and BuckingkamShire, and alsO to the money paid by the public to the Wellesley fa - - and observed, th at their sinec ures would pay a large proportion of these expences.. He mentioned one case, of a person. Whose name still remained upon the Pension List, though :she was dead. He alluded to the case of Mrs. Gitehirst, and be was qUite positive of the fad for she was his grandmo ther. Mr. WELLBSLEY POLE said, that the Noble Lord had made one of the most extraordinary speeches he had ever heard on the subjeci of Navy . Esti - mates, and he could not but regret that the Noble Lord should have thought himself warranted in deal!! ing in such strong charges,-without takingthe trouble,. in the first instance, to ascertain the fac t . .The Noble Lord had asserted that in looking over the na val pension list, it appeared that many pensions had been granted through Parliqmentary.interest. To this assertion be begged to. give a most decisive Fontradiction. Mr. Pole then entered into a lull and satisfactory explanation upon the subject of prq' sions, and of the Compassionate 'List. The Ncibl es :Lard had made some ' observations not veil' • relevant to the subject, nor very consistent with Candour, upon the places posseised by different • persons, and had talked in very eXaggerated terms of; the sinecure places posseSsed by his (Mr. . Pore'al family, The Noble Lord was grossly misinforme d updn that subjed. The only sinecure place pris' sessed by any branch of that family was one of 4000; a year, which was conferred upon - the - Noble Lor a at the head of it. He could not help regretting that the Noble Lord opposite to him did not consul his-a4wn natural good sense, and not suffer hiragel to be guided by the advice of others,. who were per' petually leading•him astray. There was to be sure some eccentricity in the Noble L or d' s manne r, bu t: there was a great deal of good BritiShstuff about s hfirk and when he confined himielf to speaking upon th e practical part of his pr o f e s s i on , h e wou l d always u 6 listened to . with the, attention and respect which hi = talents deserved. But unfortunately instead of obey' ing the dialates of his own good ' understanding, h e suffered himself sometimes, t o b e i n fl ame d an d ~" guided by persons who were . perpetually leading Noble Lord into the grossest errors. Mr: CROKER said, if those employed in' harbou r duty were•:not so employed, they must come tiPuv., Greenwich Hospital, an d o th er seamen on fu ll P"' must 'supply their place. Pressgangs had been re' duced considerably, and were still to be reduce d ' That the Noble Lord's grandmother was still :9 11 the pension 'list was true. When they bad -1 1 ) reason to believe 'a pensioner dead, but by l b , 4 - allure of the party to claini.the pension, it was 1 1 1 i common to strike .the name off the list tin ir % hope of th e claimant's return ' was extinct. N Y ,L t ie respeet•-to the canvas,' he had to inform the Nuu Lord, that experiments were now making to a , c e id r ' tarn whether the.bleached or. the unbleached cot", be used.with th e greatest -advantage. Ti,e No'bie Lon) hid complained of the seamen b`eing paid 0 :11y wb i/ t they cam?, home. If they were paid whil e abroad i s would be difficult to keep them. A few words followed from Mr. Whitbread an d Mr. Pole, and me.: Croker explained, that with r 0 pect_to 'the pension of Mrs. Douglas, who had be% alluded to. in the c ours e o f : th e d e b ate, h e r O n knight 'perhaps be of the same nature as several, 4 0 the decease of, whom, in , case o f arrears b e ing u, on their pensions, these were p a id- to t h e i r n eareP avlations. A long conversation ensued, chiefly on the o b i ; ject of the intend e d D oc k s at NO rt hfl eet, i n whic a Admiral Markham, Mr. Whitbread, Mr. Rose, at) the Chancellor of the Exchequer participated. The Resolution was then put and agreed to. ;The other Orders of the'Day were then read, au' the House adjourned at. Three o'clock thi9 w° llY g. MAILS. Attatvao—i Lisbon, a Malta, t Dublin, a Wall:11 91 " P Dus—t Gottenburgh't • t Publin ' WateAbrd. PRICE OF STOCKS 11416 •IXT TWYLVg 0 CLOCK. Consols - • • 7o ( Red. Apn. - 1-1 L S U . 6911 SOLENT QUIS DICIRE FAT.SUM ALTDLAT ? L UiVDO V, sATURDAY, MAY 12, 1810, We this day received Portuguese and Spanish pers,the fO r rmer down to the 26th The 5 0 1115 , Papers are dated th e 21 s t u l t , They bothg ie °c ' counts of skirmisheS between_ n - the French and S r 0 : niards, in which the latter, wisely adopting th e P od ; lieq of desultory wan ire,: had obtalued many vantages. They state, 'that the French .‘v , 'N st y carrying on the siege of Astorga, bi,t that their vancedguard„which•had enie:ed Bornbbi, had e ed beaten, and had. suffered much by repeated 8 " It is stated ars° that . the French troops, which on the bridges or the Tagus, had retired bA4'oe'. Yesterday the Committee app o i n t e d by the El°a ss. of 'Commons to search f o r p rece d ents , in a lse° quence of the actions brought by Sir FRANCIS t; ot DETT, against the SPEAKER, and th e SerjeO t be Arms, made their Report,. Th e p r i v il e ge of the House of Commons t o . comm it ; i n suc h,C a ses ay tI d , present, appeared to be founded-. upon an uni ll°r 7 rupted series , of precedents, front the earliest P riod to which the Journals extend. A motion s ' ° „' made by Mr. GIDDY, the Chairman of the Cam' : 1 n's mittee, that the Speake r a n d S ei j enn i be—peril'itte to plead to the actions, and that the ATTORNEY r I „ • • NERAL be Ordered to defend the actions ; win" unanimously agreed to. We. beg to. call the ru t ''' . cular attention of our readers to the speecafn t PONSONEY, in which" the most - ConstiiatiOnal P r `` ' eiples were maintained, inT ; t he most -tiloquent' ,l l o 3 , guage. He was listened t o with t h e most'pTioff ;li pfr o attention, and when he - sat down cheers,fM • • • all. sides of the Honse cOntinued, for some time , ' . WII lid ITEREAD did'not 'speak upon the estibil? therefore presume that he . concurred in w4li Mr. foiNsoNBY.., The outward-bound East India Fleet sailed , terdi) from Portsmouth,' . un d er " convoy of Pho3nix. Stitt 1 ' _--, ....._ __ 1,'91/ . ig) N : Print,A by It 1 CHARD FIA XI( IS, of No. , i , hi irtlett-eourt, Bow-street; and Publish e d by WILLIA M ARMIGER SCRIPPS, South Mgltou-street, Grosvenor square. At th' SUN -OTT'ev No 112 Strand where Adveriiseveris Chd , rs for tiv. P per Letters for the Editor ecc (post-poi 4) nuAt be addre.ucL 4 .•• 1 / 4 •i , -, 7 tc , --1 ~, •,? ,-, „ ~ 1 .• •,.. , ... ,T P 7 , *, a I, •., . • „,4..••• • r ) • •. I. , altAvirszno, MAY IQ. ti l l/ s°rl' Arrived—the Nancy, Bigrel, for S e n esa l ; Mort, froth St. Michael's; and the Ann, Collier, from St. Cr, Sailed—the 'Hanover, Adamson, for Jamaica. i I !t' t o tc to Ph; w e , ilk ) , 1 r i f i 1 , an 4 va ei k t